Close to tail. Watch out.

[DSE 3]

Arguing about it is like trying to teach that ole' pig to sing.
Yes, high speed increases risk. For everyone. But you're still moving forward at a similar speed to the aircraft regardless of the speed of the aircraft.
The risk is even greater when wings are opened, regardless of speed. Pounding on the brakes as you enter the freeway no matter how fast you're going when you enter is generally a bad idea. Ever seen a dragster deploy a drag chute?
I'm not "stuck" with an argument. My instinct, my experience, Jan's data all support my position, but if you can definitively show that there are more tail strikes of wingsuiters at high speed than there are tail strikes of wingsuiters at normal speeds, I'll change my position.
Given that we do teardrops on most every jump run, the speed is 5-7kts higher than those exiting ahead of me. I specifically spoke with the pilot about this yesterday. His "instinctive" thougth was basically the same thing I'm saying. Yet I haven't hit the tail, and only come close when wearing my tall camera helmet.

Deploying an airbrake (at any speed) in front of the horizontal stabilizer is incredibly dangerous, and is going to likely be the primary cause of said tailstrike.
Same with deploying a PC straight out the door. It's not terribly different.
As mentioned in the other thread;
Get out at 500 feet and don't deploy, you're just as gone as the guy that went out at 13,500. He just has more time to realize his mistake.
Once you cross the threshold, an impact directly on the back, neck, or thoracic cavity is most likely to leave you with a very bad day. We're way beyond the threshold at 85kts and higher. We can gain *some*altitude on the door at virtually any speed with open wings.
Does a slower speed give you marginal decrease in risk? Of course it does. Who gives a shit? Your wing is supposed to be closed until you see the tail. Whether you're going 75kts or 115kts.
This is why (gasp) people exit Cessna's and King Airs every day, yet don't hit the tail.
The jumper isn't asking the pilot, "What's our airspeed?" but rather exiting (hopefully) in a consistent manner that avoids the tail.

I guess I keep coming from the perspective of this particular incident, because what happened is very clear. And it had nothing to do with airspeed.
Why you insist on confusing the issue is well beyond me. Maybe you prefer distracting the pilot on jumprun as he's trying to turn the plane and level it out?

Again...prove me wrong. The fatality database is pretty clear, USPA has solid records; demonstrate that high speed exits have caused more fatal tailstrikes than standard speed exits.

I'm somewhat surprised no one is talking about ground altitude, exit altitude, landing altitude, and an AAD. Seems to be a bigger learning point in my view.

I know you need to blame someone and or something. That's understandable. But there is nothing here to blame except technique.

[fasted3 0]

Quote

I know you need to blame someone and or something. That's understandable. But there is nothing here to blame except technique.

Wrong. technique is the primary cause.

But what do I know?

[IslandGuy 0]

Quote

Quote

Why to use something else than you teach on FFC? There was only one thing there: arch.

I dont teach anything else in the FFC.
Exit, arch. Head in your neck, arms back, feet bent and on your ass.
Its the 'mummy' arm position other people use that surprises me.

If you want to dive in freefall, and minimize lift, I gues they also swoop their arms back. I dont see why (in the exit) you would suddenly do different and put your arms in front..
Counter productive in many ways..

I aways exit with my arms on my chest, not crossed (is that mummy position?).

I protect my handles and protect my body/face. Once clear of the a/c and others, hands extend to my hips and then out - then fly.

I have never been out of a 182 or 206 in a wingsuit, maybe arms on chest won't work in those instances.

But for me, personally, piling out of an otter at any speed bent over and doing the penguin walk out the door with 20 other birds, I keep my arms on my chest, protect my handles and body, stay small, then sequence the deployment of my wings after clearing the tail.

But that's just what works for me, and that's all I can recommend. Protect your handles, protect your body, stay small.

[mccordia 73]

If you look at incidents in the door with canopies coming out, its also the main hackey that deserves most attention. Especialy for people who use a hackey-ball. Having the arms tucked back, and around your rig also aint that bad a position.

But again, the smoother transition to controlled flight is what concerns me most.
But as long as it works, every technique is probably okay..

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[The111 0]

Quote

If you want to dive in freefall, and minimize lift, I gues they also swoop their arms back. I dont see why (in the exit) you would suddenly do different and put your arms in front..
Counter productive in many ways..

I disagree.

When I want to dive in freefall, I fold my arms in front of my chest. No matter how far behind your back you try to put your arms, there are two problems. (1) With big wings they will still catch air and cause drag and (2) it is not possible to put your arms completely behind your back unless you have very weird shoulders and a very thin rig. When folding your arms in front, you can get them COMPLETELY in front of your body, making your "width" as narrow as possible... your shoulder width. You also are folding the wings inward so they catch no air and the relative wind works to keep them in this position.

In my old S3, with my arms folded in front, I've hit speeds above 200mph in a dive with no wing flappage. I tried once diving as fast as possible with my arms behind my back, and not holding my grippers... the result was swollen fingers, friction burns on my S3 wings, and both of my grippers literally tore out of the wing from the high speed flapping. This proves that I wasn't getting my wingtips out of the airflow like I do when I pull them in front of me to the center of my chest. With bigger wings like a SM1 or Stealth, this is even more important, as the wingtips are connected to more wing. It is very easy to bring the wingtips all the way to the center of your chest in front... it is impossible to bring them all the way to the center of your back behind. As I said before, this is due to both the way our joints work, and the fact that we have rigs on our back.

For all of those same reasons, I do the same thing on exit. Arms collapsed in front. The same thing Scott is doing on deployment here, but I go even further and overlap the wings... something you definitely can't do behind your back.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[The111 0]

Quote

But that's just what works for me, and that's all I can recommend. Protect your handles, protect your body, stay small.

Exactly. If I made a doorway that was slightly narrower than your shoulder width and asked you to walk through without turning sideways, you'd have a better chance if you folded your arms in front rather than behind. We can make ourselves smaller that way. Try it.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[mccordia 73]

Im not talking about the position in the door, but just the position you adopt the moment you hit the relative wind.

Personaly, I achieve higher speeds with the winds collapsed behind me, as it turns me into a smooth arrow. If you watch the hercules boogie video from 2004 on flylikebrick, there is quite some footage on Perry 'trying' to get down (in a belly to earth position, not talking diving) but the arms in front of his body are actually cupping wind, breaking, and making him wobble quite a lot.

Attached a still-frame showing Robi do a diving exit in this exact position. Looks nice and streamlined, no armwing flapping (and this is a big suit, and a big rig). Just tilting his hands outward already give him control of his wing.

Ive hit 225 mph in a stealth2 during a dive in this position. Im a tad heavier than you, so probably roughly comparable speeds, would I lay of the donuts and half a liter of coka cola every day...

I like the delicate and immidate controll I have over the armwings with this method, which i cant imagine having with my arms crossed in front (which I do in the opening, be it to grab my risers/mlw on my rig).

But as I mentioned before..I guess different techniques work for different people..as long as you stay small...the end result is the same..and there are probably pro's and cons one could come up with for both methods.

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

I know you need to blame someone and or something. That's understandable. But there is nothing here to blame except technique.

Wrong. technique is the primary cause.

The same faulty technique would likely turn up the same exact result regardless of airspeed (with regard to this particular instance)
How you keep missing the point is beyond me; a thousand high speed exits occurred in the week with zero tail strike. At least 100 exits post that day have been high speed, no tail strike,
One person went ahead, and two behind the fatality, none of these three had tail strikes. Airspeed isn't nearly as relevant as you seem to think it is.
Tell ya what...try this instead.
Get a flatbed pickup, stand on the back while wearing your wingsuit. Speed the truck up to 65mph, as that's about as slow as any of us are going to be exiting. Once you've hit speed, open up fully. See what happens at extremely low speeds.
You've been given a shot at changing my mind, waiting on that data over here. Please demonstrate your point.

[lurch 0]

Jarno, putting my arms behind me wasn't enough. Not from an Otter at 140. I'm not a heavy guy, 135 lbs average, call it 70 kilos. Like I said in that post from a year ago, I worked my way up to those speeds gradually. I was also far from being a beginner when I was doing those exits. I would not train a newbie to exit that way. I'd started off with my wings simply pulled back, but even that was too much drag and too much lift. I got unpredictable results that way and sometimes went up during those exits before I'd cleared the tail. Not up very far, but up enough to spook me. Arms across my chest was far more controllable and the closest thing to "balled up" I could do for an exit while still "flying" the exit enough to take advantage of the speed and fly up after I'd cleared the tail. Exiting with my arms at my sides or behind me makes me about 6 inches wider than having my forearms in an X in front of me and at 140+ knots it made a BIG difference in the manageability of that exit. The point of the X style was that it allowed me to not just have my wings back, but actually pulled tight around my sides and front-no loose fabric at the sides at all-making me as dragless and narrow as I could possibly get with a front profile no wider than my ribcage itself. I found the conditions of a 140 knot Otter exit so extreme there was a big noticeable difference even if I just allowed my elbows to stick out to the sides. I wanted to make sure I didn't gain ANY altitude until I'd cleared the tail and the X arms thing was the only way to guarantee that.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[mccordia 73]

Quote

Jarno, putting my arms behind me wasn't enough. Not from an Otter at 140.

It works fine for me at speeds at and over 140 knots...and I more than regularly do those.
Even 130 knot exits from cessna's with the tail lower than my body on exit, and A LOT closer than it is on an otter. I exit flat, keep the fwd speed, but do a bit of a drop. Slowly open wings, and ride at level with the cessna for quite some time.

Putting the arms allong your body, like in a resting position. presents no wing at all to the relative wind. Profile wise, if you are flat, also no change.

The things you mention seem to indicate you get hit on the chest/front by the wind (standing upright), which makes no sense if its the tail you are worried about. You want to be flat immidiately, as this only presents a head and shoulders to the relative wind in terms of profile, compared to a full body when standing upright..

And thats ignoring immidiately being able to fly. Why bleed of the airplane speed, and than work to start building it again.
Be small and flat....keep the fwd speed. Dont have your body (small as it is) be a big airbrake pushing you towards the rear stabilisor..

On small airplanes, with the tail within hands reach after exit, the difference is quite obvious in both techniques...

Aerodynamicly, you guys are saying a distorted front profile, is better than a smooth bullet-shape. Which seems to make no sense.

But again..if it works for you....dont change a thing..

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[fasted3 0]

OK Spot, I tried it.
Seems like the faster I go, the more lift I get.
Go figure.

But what do I know?

[fasted3 0]

Quote

Im not talking about the position in the door, but just the position you adopt the moment you hit the relative wind.

Personaly, I achieve higher speeds with the winds collapsed behind me, as it turns me into a smooth arrow. If you watch the hercules boogie video from 2004 on flylikebrick, there is quite some footage on Perry 'trying' to get down (in a belly to earth position, not talking diving) but the arms in front of his body are actually cupping wind, breaking, and making him wobble quite a lot.

Attached a still-frame showing Robi do a diving exit in this exact position. Looks nice and streamlined, no armwing flapping (and this is a big suit, and a big rig). Just tilting his hands outward already give him control of his wing.

Ive hit 225 mph in a stealth2 during a dive in this position. Im a tad heavier than you, so probably roughly comparable speeds, would I lay of the donuts and half a liter of coka cola every day...

I like the delicate and immidate controll I have over the armwings with this method, which i cant imagine having with my arms crossed in front (which I do in the opening, be it to grab my risers/mlw on my rig).

But as I mentioned before..I guess different techniques work for different people..as long as you stay small...the end result is the same..and there are probably pro's and cons one could come up with for both methods.

I had not considered an exit with hands behind me. Interesting. My concern would be freaking out for some reason and opening up too soon. As long as you can keep it closed, it should work.

But what do I know?

[The111 0]

Quote

Aerodynamicly, you guys are saying a distorted front profile, is better than a smooth bullet-shape. Which seems to make no sense.

The only aerodynamics that matters in this case is projected surface area. My analogy about "walking through a door" had nothing to do with the airplane door, it was just showing that we can make ourselves "narrower" by pulling our arms in front due to the way our shoulders work.

I'm sure your way works fine, but the fact remains you cannot make yourself as narrow by pulling your arms behind. You also have to really squeeze hard if you are pulling your arms in to the side, to prevent the wind from pulling them back out. Not so when you pull them in front, since the wind just helps them stay collapsed.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[mccordia 73]

Quote

I had not considered an exit with hands behind me. Interesting. My concern would be freaking out for some reason and opening up too soon.

Id have that same fear when my half where on my cutaway/reserve handles in the front. But I guess only Richard Branson pulls those for no real reason

Quote

As long as you can keep it closed, it should work.

The relative wind keeps em closed..its a concious decission (and effort) to open them. I wouldnt even know how to exit otherwise...

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[DSE 3]

Quote

OK Spot, I tried it.
Seems like the faster I go, the more lift I get.
Go figure.

Your post is meaningless without video.

Duh, really??
Has it been argued that any different result would occur? Nope. Nice attempt to divert the context of the discussion tho.

That is NOT the argument taking place here.
You're of the opinion that airspeed is to blame here. It's not. 3 others exited at the same speed; all were fine.
Far more tailstrikes have occurred at "normal" and slower speeds than at high speeds. Because of technique.
We're not interested in acquiring more lift, we're interested in missing the tail. And regardless of airspeed, we're able to successfully do so, using techniques that are consistent.
Experienced wingsuiters know how to deal with exits regardless of speed, and we don't have to distract the pilot to do so.

[parachutist 1]

Quote

You want to be flat immidiately, as this only presents a head and shoulders to the relative wind in terms of profile, compared to a full body when standing upright..

That seems like a great way to avoid gaining lift during exit. If I'm envisioning what you're describing, you're basically going head down into the relative wind right out the door.

Head down takes some practice though. When learning head down it's very easy to cork out of it by having some part of body in wrong position. It seems like the exit you're describing would be similarly finicky and easy to get spun around if you're not good at head down already.

Are you teaching FFC students this exit technique, and if so, how are they doing with stability during exit? Does it make much difference whether they were belly flyers or freeflyers before trying this exit for WS?

[mccordia 73]

Thats a technique for experienced flyers on high speed exits (anyone asking for 140 knt exits on FFCs from side door planes needs his head examined).
But the headdown description is accurate. There are some bellymount shots in my last video with some 'flat' exits. Not that hsrd, and in control and flying your body straight from exit.

On FFCs, and all normal speed exits, a hard arch is all thats needed. Much like normal exits taught on aff/sl courses.
Legs on the butt, arch, head back, arms back (or in front, as some seem to prefer).
With arms besides/behind you giving you more subtle snd immidiate controll straight away.
Doing exactly the same youd do in a dive (with or without wingsuit).

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[parachutist 1]

Quote

Thats a technique for experienced flyers on high speed exits (anyone asking for 140 knt exits on FFCs from side door planes needs his head examined).
But the headdown description is accurate. There are some bellymount shots in my last video with some 'flat' exits. Not that hsrd, and in control and flying your body straight from exit.

On FFCs, and all normal speed exits, a hard arch is all thats needed. Much like normal exits taught on aff/sl courses.
Legs on the butt, arch, head back, arms back (or in front, as some seem to prefer).
With arms besides/behind you giving you more subtle snd immidiate controll straight away.
Doing exactly the same youd do in a dive (with or without wingsuit).

Ok, that makes sense. I didn't recognize who it was intended for. I'd like to start playing with the flat exit idea during slow passes when I get some time. It sounds useful.

[fasted3 0]

The argument is whether additional airspeed causes increased risk of hitting the tail.
I'm of the opinion that improper exit technique was the primary cause of this incident. Additional factors were a large wingsuit and a higher than normal airspeed. The same mistake in technique done in a smaller suit, or at a lower speed, may have allowed the jumper to pass below the tail rather than hitting it. Yes, this is an opinion, and speculation.
By the way, I don't distract the pilot. I do talk to them on the ground, and only when necessary on the plane. I can see the airspeed indicator from where I sit, and have successfully looked at it without distracting either the pilot or myself.
I am not looking to assign blame in this incident. The responsibility to exit safely rests with the jumper, and like all of us, he did it at his own risk.
Airspeed did not cause this incident. I do think that it is nevertheless a factor in it.
I posted a video showing a bad exit. It did not result in an accident, but I'm pretty damn sure it would have, had the plane been flying faster. What if it was going 140 kts? Arguing that it wouldn't make any difference just doesn't make sense.
My argument is that airspeed does make a difference.

But what do I know?

[mccordia 73]

I also believe technique, airspeed and suitsize are three factors that (seperate or combined) are the main contributers to the risk factor of tailstrike. With the airplane design (rear stabiliser placement) being an equally important factor.

Choosing between a group exit from a Turbolet or PAC 750, I dont think a single jumper would have dificulty choosing...Both possible, but the later for sure demands more care..

Trying to point to 1 factor as THE cause is IMO not possible...

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[DSE 3]

Quote

I also believe technique, airspeed and suitsize are three factors that (seperate or combined) are the main contributers to the risk factor of tailstrike. With the airplane design (rear stabiliser placement) being an equally important factor.

Choosing between a group exit from a Turbolet or PAC 750, I dont think a single jumper would have dificulty choosing...Both possible, but the later for sure demands more care..

Trying to point to 1 factor as THE cause is IMO not possible...

I agree entirely.
In this particular incident, it seems that some think that the high speed was the primary cause when in fact, it was not.
A slower speed would have almost assuredly ended with the same result.
Higher airspeed does not always result in a tailstrike (rarely, in fact). Fully opening a wing on exit at any speed almost assures a very near miss or tail strike on a side exit aircraft.

[fasted3 0]

Quote

Quote

I also believe technique, airspeed and suitsize are three factors that (seperate or combined) are the main contributers to the risk factor of tailstrike. With the airplane design (rear stabiliser placement) being an equally important factor.

Choosing between a group exit from a Turbolet or PAC 750, I dont think a single jumper would have dificulty choosing...Both possible, but the later for sure demands more care..

Trying to point to 1 factor as THE cause is IMO not possible...

I agree entirely.

>>>No, you don't. Jarno cited 3 factors, one of which you are about to discount, entirely.

In this particular incident, it seems that some think that the high speed was the primary cause when in fact, it was not.
A slower speed would have almost assuredly ended with the same result.

>>>How do you know this?
You speak with such assurance.

Higher airspeed does not always result in a tailstrike (rarely, in fact).

>>>Maybe the fact that high speed exits are rarely done plays into this. Add the fact that when they are done, they are done with extreme care.

Fully opening a wing on exit at any speed almost assures a very near miss or tail strike on a side exit aircraft.

Fully opening is a mistake. At higher airspeeds and with bigger wings, it MAY just get ya.

But what do I know?

[DAN0 0]

The argument between DSE and FASTED3 is infinately entertaining to me because I believe they are both right.

Obviously, a higher airspeed will put you into the tail (IF your wings are open)

AND

Obviously, it is possible to hit the tail in slower airspeeds (when your wings are open)

So we all agree that keeping your wings closed is the best way to avoid a tail strike (Wingsuit Rule #1). With this in mind I don't think airspeed matters if your gonna hit the tail anyway if you exit with your wings open. Keep them closed until you see the stabilizer.

The only argument would be: How fast does the plane have to fly in order to cause a tail strike to a jumper with his wings fully closed?

[phoenixlpr 0]

Well, we can blame the plane too. He would have flown over the tail of a Caravan or King Air without any contact.

[timve 0]

this info might be usefull for people jumping out of smaller crafts like the 182 or 206 cessna. Whilst jumping out, from the inside, I try to create space between me and the aircraft, staying flat (to maintain forward speed) hands and wings in front of me (when I put them behind me, I can't push off with my hands), After 2 secs I open my wings and float up immediatly to gain alti again. It works for me, and keeps me way out of reach of the stabilazor.
the pics show this "safe" setup
I know Jarno, not as you taught me, but it works...

oxygen wingsuitteam
check out our newest movie
Trainingweek Seville Spain 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwtzc1RDzDQ